Proselytizing

Subject: RE: Proselytizing
From: Allan C.
Date: 07 Oct 99 - 07:16 AM

Ewe guise err two mulch!

Subject: RE: Proselytizing
From: katlaughing
Date: 07 Oct 99 - 05:29 AM

Isn't it supposed to be a faux spaw?*G*

Subject: RE: Proselytizing
From: Joe Offer
Date: 07 Oct 99 - 02:35 AM

Uh....sorry, Allan. Waitaminit, and lemme take my foot out of my mouth. I got lost amidst the peaks, and I missed your use of the word. While it was genuinely incorrect, it was certainly sincere and well-intentioned. I think we could call it a noble gaffe, a faux pas of the highest order. Make you feel any better?
-Joe Offer-

Subject: RE: Proselytizing
From: katlaughing
Date: 06 Oct 99 - 11:48 PM

Ahem, WW.....don't you mean schwing?**BG**

Subject: RE: Proselytizing
From: WyoWoman
Date: 06 Oct 99 - 11:11 PM

It don't mean a thing if it don't got that swing.

Spelling is important, but spirit is what sings.

WW

Subject: RE: Proselytizing
From: Larry B.
Date: 06 Oct 99 - 11:10 PM

I don't play an instrument and have never been to any kind of a folk music gathering, but I like to sing and I know what songs I like. Since I like most of what I see in the DT, I guess I like folk, and I like the folks at Mudcat. Even if not all the threads relate to folk music, they are written by and appeal to people who enjoy it.

There's my two cents. Next?

Subject: RE: Proselytizing
From: Little Neophyte
Date: 06 Oct 99 - 09:39 PM

Mighty greatful Catspaw & MamaKat I've been sweating over the spelling bees Little Neo

Subject: RE: Proselytizing
From: catspaw49
Date: 06 Oct 99 - 09:24 PM

Miz Kat I doan seez as how that spellin shud be enny problem to someone cuz I never holt with folks whut ar that picky. Ime a gud speller an I always try to giv them whatz lez forchnet a brake on sich nonsense.

CLETUS

Subject: RE: Proselytizing
From: katlaughing
Date: 06 Oct 99 - 09:15 PM

If anything, spelling *picking* can be more intimidating than anything in a website, to newcomers. I've had several newbies send me personal messages asking about spellcheck because they are so nervous about possibly making a mistake.

Subject: RE: Proselytizing
From: catspaw49
Date: 06 Oct 99 - 09:12 PM

Catspaw's down in the basement abeetin' on that fone box thing an cursin alot so I set down an red this here thred cuz I shur am intersted in ritin prose. But bout all I kin find iz sum stuff from that smart Peter guy about pie queds ur sumpin and Joe asayin bout letters an all. Well Ime a man uv letters cuz I git lots of em. Like I got a letter jez thother day from my parole offsir and ain't nary day passes what I don't git 3 or 4 of em from folks what think I owe em money. I git lotza letters but aint a one of em sez nothin bout no pie queds. Senz Ime alwayz wantin to improve my vocaboolarry, what iz a pie qued? I saw some simpleass thing down to the hardware that might fit the bill here, but whut I wanna know iz canya git sich a pie deevize offn them Popeil folks on the TV or mebbee down to the K-Mart. Ide preeshiate enny help yall cud gimmeee here even tho I still doan git whut pie and letters got to do with prose ritin.

CLETUS

Subject: RE: Proselytizing
From: Allan C.
Date: 06 Oct 99 - 07:32 PM

Peter and Joe and all. My apologies for using the incorrect spelling of the word. I knew at the time it was wrong. But my poor brain just couldn't dredge up the right spelling and I couldn't think of a synonym. I promise to do better in the future.

Subject: RE: Proselytizing
From: Joe Offer
Date: 06 Oct 99 - 06:30 PM

Peter, I think the people in the U.S. who are well-lettered enough to know the meaning of "piqued" aren't going to goof up on the spelling.
-Joe Offer-

Subject: RE: Proselytizing
From: sophocleese
Date: 06 Oct 99 - 06:19 PM

Folks is folks and folks is Folks. I think that if general conversation had been kept in a back room I would have felt less comfortable joining in with either the music or the B.S. threads. I've only been here a month so I can remember what it was like to first start posting. Some people prefer starting conversations with business and then getting sociable-like whereas others prefer an off topic introduction before they're comfortable talking business. Discovering what the difference in the threads is isn't rocket science so I figure if people can turn their computer on and then get to the Mudcat they've got the will to sort that out and decide what they want and what they don't want to read.

Peter T. I don't think I have seen any use of 'peaked' instead of 'piqued', then again there's a lot of places I haven't peeked at. Of course I live in Ontario so maybe the use of peaking hasn't piqued here yet.

Subject: RE: Proselytizing
From: Jo Taylor
Date: 06 Oct 99 - 06:06 PM

Alice - it was I who asked you to repost the links for the singing technique threads, I do apologise if I didn't thank you at the time - I think I did, on the 'How do you know what voice you have' thread (probably not its true title). Anyway thank you, I really appreciated it and have been making some strange noises ever since. Am going to take my voice out with me on Saturday and see if it works...
I've been here for just over a year now but haven't posted a lot recently - prefer the music threads but do read quite a lot of the others. Don't really know the answer to the question - I recommended a friend to take a look the other day but thought at the time I didn't know what he'd make of the BS threads, I think they take a while to get used to... Sorry, no answers. Think I prefer it when the topics have at least a passing relevance to music.
Jo Taylor

Subject: RE: Proselytizing
From: Little Neophyte
Date: 06 Oct 99 - 05:53 PM

Hi Joe, For the survey, I'm very new and I have found the Mudcat rich with resourceful knowledge, expertise, laughter, warmth, creativity and kindness. I contantly learn and continue coming back because it is so much fun. Little Neo

Subject: RE: Proselytizing
From: --seed
Date: 06 Oct 99 - 05:02 PM

And don't forget it.

Peter, I think even here in the savage new world, many of us are piqued when we see peaked used it its place.

And Neal, I have thought you one of our most entertaining members and you aren't one? Go ahead, sign up. All it means is not having to type in your cookie each time you post.

--seed

Subject: RE: Proselytizing
From: Michael K.
Date: 06 Oct 99 - 05:01 PM

(To Allan C.)

Very interesting story and it triggered a memory of something I'd not thought of in years.

When I was attending university, some 25 + years ago, I once called 411 information to get a number, and like yourself, I was feeling playful at the time, and starting chatting up the operator who seemed equally playful with me.

One thing led to another and I mustered up the nerve to ask her out for a date, and to my surprise she accepted, and to my additional surprise she actually showed up at the designated meeting place, and, she was drop-dead gorgeous! We dated for about 6 months (after which, it had basically run its course) but I sure learned alot about "operator assistance" during this time period.

Thanks for evoking this memory for me Allan!

Subject: RE: Proselytizing
From: --seed
Date: 06 Oct 99 - 04:57 PM

Subject: RE: Proselytizing
From: Peter T.
Date: 06 Oct 99 - 04:46 PM

Have Americans gone completely over to "peaked" for "piqued"? I note that almost everything I read by American publishers these days has "peaked". Not complaining, but it piqued my interest.
yours, Peter T.

Subject: RE: Proselytizing
From: Joe Offer
Date: 06 Oct 99 - 12:42 PM

Well, I gotta say that the discussion in this thread makes me feel a lot more comfortable about things. Thanks, my friends.
-Joe Offer-

Subject: RE: Proselytizing
From: Alice
Date: 06 Oct 99 - 10:41 AM

j0 77, I downloaded RealProducer this summer and tried sending Max, Big Mick, and Alison some songs... they will attest that for some reason, it just doesn't work for me, although I eventually got one song sent to Big Mick. RealProducer played havoc with my system, so I removed it and just use the Player... I don't know if it is because I have a Motorola Mac that isn't even made any longer, ... anyway, I also can't use MediaRing, and VoiceMail works for me sometimes but not others... well. I just need the time to do that cassette and send it to Max at this point. If I had the money, I'd purchase whatever I need to make it work, but we live on a shoestring as it is.

To get back to the subject of this thread, proselytizing, when it becomes technically easier/cheaper for 'folks' to post sound files, I think that will be an additional way to spread the 'sound' of folk music through the internet. I have a Musicmail email list with my website (the list has dust and cobwebs on in right now) and my hope is that someday people from all over the world on that list will be emailing their songs and tunes to each other to hear, not just to read the lyrics.

Mudcat is a great place, isn't it?

Subject: RE: Proselytizing
From: catspaw49
Date: 06 Oct 99 - 09:44 AM

Geez Allan...Spectacular post man!!!! Really!!

I had missed your "General Store" analogy before, but its right on the money. Its also true I think that someone will take the lead a bit in those situations and often as not, if I feel there's nothing of substance to add after awhile, I return to the cracker barrel and checkerboard. The current thread on music theory is superb and I missed out at the beginning so now I'm just reading along. The only posting I would make would only reiterate what had been said. I learned awhile back that before I post to such a thread, I recheck/update the thread before I hit "Submit"

Somebody want to chunk another lump of coal in the stove there.........Fall mornings are gettin' right cool.

Spaw

Subject: RE: Proselytizing
From: Allan C.
Date: 06 Oct 99 - 09:25 AM

I think we all recognize that the 'Cat has changed, is changing, and will continue to change. Over the years we have discovered the lyrics to and discussed most of the better-known songs (and many of the obscure ones as well). This has the effect of curtailing many "music" questions that newbies might have wanted to ask. Now we are getting to songs that perhaps only a few of us have ever heard of. That has a way of limiting discussion as well.

This is what keeps me out of many of the current music threads. I will admit to knowing absolutely nothing about the music of the U.K.. Discussions about songs in Gaelic or whatever other languages besides American English exclude me as well. You just won't find me posting to those.

On the other hand, I truly love the threads about the meaning of songs, of phrases within songs, or words. The two recent threads about salt pork and cas(t)tle bloat are two examples.

I don't always have much to add to what has been said sometimes because many of you have far more "folk knowledge" than I. But I have never felt that I couldn't jump into a discussion if I wanted to do so.

So, since many of the music threads are about things I can't relate to, I am grateful to have the other threads to read (and participate in) while I watch for the coming of a new music thread that I can sink my teeth into.

In another thread I likened us to the bunch who sits around the stove in the general store and discusses various things until somebody comes along and asks for directions. Then we fall all over each other trying to describe the best route. Then, after each has submitted a comment or two about which landmarks to look for and which turns to make, we return to our cracker barrels and our discussions.

I suspect that some of this may change a little when we get the MudChat thing working. I will admit to being irritated at a few recent threads which were little more than an exchange between two posters. Such discussions were far too exclusionary to be posted in the forum. Just my opinion. Perhaps the MudChat will take care of that. And maybe SOME of the non-music threads will find their way to the chatrooms as well. I certainly hope that not all will disappear.

My very first post here was on the "The shortest definition of folk" - not, strictly speaking, a music thread. It was the first thing I saw here that peaked my interest. I think this is the sort of thing that keeps some of us "lurking". And, after we get a chance to see the lay of the land, we feel comfortable enough to actually post something. This was my own experience. I imagine it is the same for many others.

It was not just the music threads which kept me here at the start. It was the threads like, "Does Anyone Know How Shula Is Doing?" and "ARRGH! (not pirate songs)" and "Why We Gravitate To The Mudcat". These, in their various ways, let me know what kind of people were gathered here.

I think such threads still continue to define us and let newcomers see who we are. And it is the thread drift (which I like a lot better than "creep") such as this one, that make things so very interesting.

Subject: RE: Proselytizing
From: WyoWoman
Date: 06 Oct 99 - 09:00 AM

Ain't democracy a wonder?

A pain in the patootie sometimes, but just simply a wonder.

WW

Subject: RE: Proselytizing
From: Neil Lowe
Date: 06 Oct 99 - 08:48 AM

Salient points (as I have come to expect) made here. As I am not a member I hesitate to offer my opinion, but what the hey, as I don't have to be a member to post (and to me that makes it a public forum), I figure I have just as much right as the next person to smear my ramblings across this thread. You have just as much right as the next person to read or ignore them. That is freedom of choice. I think the BS designation and the absurd thread title is enough (sort of like our TV and movie ratings here in the U.S.) to alert a prospective newcomer that there is something a little more lighthearted going on than the origins of a certain tune, etc. I sympathize with Joe's concerns about what a newcomer thinks when they first click into the threads, but one curious click on a BS thread and they will soon decide whether they want to be a part of that particular zaniness or not. Again, sort of like the On and Off switch on a TV.

The BS in a way encourages and promotes the discussion of folk....because everything that is posted here is under the general umbrella of folk and blues by default, there has been an occasion that I can personally point to where something mentioned in a BS discussion has piqued my interest and led me to research further along the lines of folk music and tradition. One can find gems anywhere they chance to look, if they keep their eyes open.

I also lament the occasional obscene word that worms its way into the postings - not that I am offended by such...I spent 7 years, 4 months and 19 days (5 hours, 4 minutes, 3 seconds...was I counting?) in the military and can curse a blue streak with the best of them. But again, as I consider this a public forum I refrain from doing so out of respect to others who may not want to read such words, newcomers or no...just as I would not stand in the check-out line at the supermarket amongst a diverse crowd and mutter the "f" word out loud ... I think that is just common courtesy and respect to fellow human beings.

As I have said before, I know very little about folk music or music in general, so I pop in and out to check on the BS because I enjoy the creative juices that get squeezed out in those threads. And there is some really fine stuff being posted in the BS threads, better in some instances than what one can find in print. Occasionally I have need to ask a music related question, and I appreciate that there are experts here who can answer virtually any question. I am an outsider and it doesn't bother me that I don't get some of the inside jokes - didn't get them the first time through. I scroll right on through an arcane passage, knowing that if I wanted to, I could research and figure out what they were talking about.

Kat is right about folk music...the genre covers many topics and is itself sometimes whimsical and humorous, just like the threads posted to this forum. All the myriad personalities expressing their thoughts, opinions, etc. make for an atmosphere of diversity that is an education in itself. Yes, it may be primarily a music forum, but it's the BS that fleshes out the 'Cat and makes it indeed a special place. My 2 coppers.

Neil Lowe

Subject: RE: Proselytizing
From: Big Mick
Date: 06 Oct 99 - 08:18 AM

I don't know how many times we have to go over this. This is not, nor in my memory has it ever been a strictly music site. There have been many of those that have come and gone. This is a site about music, the events that spawn the music, and the most importantly, the people that make the music. We discuss and assist on these things using our knowledge of the past, what is happening now, and where we all think it is headed. I get tired of the boring folks that whine about it not being musical enough. Take a look at the DT, and the lyric additions in the thread. And look at the fascinating discussions that pop up about the music, it's origins, and the politics and events that spawned it. This is like all the other lyrics sites, except they are one dimensional. This site is 50 layers deep. That is what has brought us all together and keeps us together. Think about what our Alice has said. Think about why you are still here and why it is your favorite site. I will bet my thong and potato that it is not just because of the lyrics. Hell, I will even throw in that slinky number and wig.....................Now, I am off to Traverse City for a couple of days and then on to the FSGW Getaway. See you all Tuesday of next week.

All the best,

Mick

Subject: RE: Proselytizing
From: catspaw49
Date: 06 Oct 99 - 07:44 AM

Simply amazing......

I hadn't checked this thread since it was heading for TV land and thought I'd see how things were progressing...and I find this! And its for that very reason that the 'Cat is such a great place.

This topic pops up here and there and that's healthy. So's the 'Cat........

Liam....thanks for your insight.........

Seed....I think that about sums it up for me too, but alas, your "Supreme Moronicity" (oxy et al) remains intact.

Spaw

Subject: RE: Proselytizing
From: katlaughing
Date: 06 Oct 99 - 06:49 AM

Folk music is not, at least should not be, sterile. It is about life and events, etc, things that I don't believe can be or should be compartmentalised. We just had a marvelous discussion on several songs including Cotton Eyed Joe.

It's been said before: if people think there aren't enough music threads, all they have to do is start some.

If there is segregation, even important and non-musical threads such as this one would be banished to a backroom.

The new people who've sent me personal messages generally are very positive, if a little confused at times, about the site. They are usually blown away by the knowledge, the caring, and the willingness to be helpful; they are also amazed and enthused about how it seems to be a total community with all of the types one would find in a real community.

IMHO there would be no way to keep threads strictly musical or strictly alternative. Both creep into the other, just like in real life. Segregating them would be cumbersome, would require judgement calls and a limited type of censorship, and, I believe, would lead to a lot of people missing out on the incredible knowledge which permeates almost every thread, whether it is about music or not.

kat

Subject: RE: Proselytizing
From: Joe Offer
Date: 06 Oct 99 - 04:26 AM

I don't know that there is an answer to my question, but I think it's a good idea to ask it every once in a while. A little introspection never hurt anybody. The 'Cat is a good thing, and I think it's worthwhile to examine what makes it what it is, and how to keep it that way.
It's true that the "BS" may help to continue the community when the music discussion gets a little dry - and I've seen that happen every once in a while. Still, I wish it were not quite so visible, that it were not the major thing people see when they first come to the forum. While there may be fewer "BS" threads, the messages are typically longer and the threads are posted to more frequently, so they turn up on the top of the menu. Music questions often fade away before they're answered, but the "BS" threads go on and on and on.
If I were to ask what is the primary purpose of the 'Cat, what would your answer be? Is it a chat room, or is it a music forum? I think that most of us, even the most prolific "BS" posters, would say that it's primarily a music forum - and a darn valuable one, at that.
I'm not saying there's anything wrong with the "BS" threads. I just think it might be a good idea to watch the balance, to ask if what we do encourages or discourages the discussion of folk music.
-Joe Offer-

Subject: RE: Proselytizing
From: alison
Date: 06 Oct 99 - 04:10 AM

I do like the 'cat... I liked it the old way... I like it the new way... although sometimes people can feel "left out" of many of the insider jokes.... and that's where we need to be careful... (although recently there have been threads addressing this and trying to give explanations)

The BS helps us to learn about each other and that is good..... but there is a lot of very personal stuff ... and much of that belongs in chat rooms (come one Max... get it fixed again please) or in private messages.... you can cover the same ground much quicker without "annoying" others who would rather the subject stayed to music.

slainte

alison

Subject: RE: Proselytizing
From: bseed(charleskratz)
Date: 06 Oct 99 - 03:22 AM

This is much ado about nothing. Music threads outnumber non-music by three or four or seven to one. Again, if non-musical threads hang around a long time it's because Muddies vote to keep them by clicking on them and posting to them. There is no in-group here, or maybe it's that everybody who wants to be a member of the in-group is welcomed as such. Here we make some music, we make some jokes, we make some friends--Joe, Mudcat Orthodoxy is an oxymoron. --seed

Subject: RE: Proselytizing
From: j0_77
Date: 06 Oct 99 - 02:49 AM

Alice you can record and mix down a 2 1/2 minute song into 350 KB - That will upload in a couple of minutes. You need a RealProducer as well as the RealPlayer. Also handy to have a Mic and some kind of home recording to make the master. I use a Nickamichi Analogue and a Sony Digital to make sound on sound tracks. I use a fostex Scrach Pad to fiddle with that and that also is a handy Mixer.

Another way is to make a wav file and use a MP3 utility to convert that into MP3 format. Varies from 50% to 90% reduction in a file. 10 megs can be 'zipped' into any where from 100kb to 5 megs.

You could use any two tape recorders or if you prefer to use the computer there are excellent software packs out there that do the same thing. I am already used to the old way and cannot change, so I've not bothered with the software way. Any Pentium machine with a soundcard and a big hard drive will do the job well. 1 Minute of 48 khz stereo is 5 megs. Typical mix down is 30 minutes so - 150 meg - a higher speed drive is also recommended and lots of memory like 64 meg or better.

Actually it is cheaper to use old technology as you could get 2 used stereo video recorders and a mixer to do the same job. Audio quality on stereo video recorders is xcellent.

Subject: RE: Proselytizing
From: Alice
Date: 06 Oct 99 - 01:34 AM

I was thinking about why this is still my favorite website. I have enjoyed the developments of the different personalities that arrive. There was a time before the joking and fun became so common that the forum actually did start to stall in a sense - every new post triggered a response (from me included, as in the Trad TV above), that "oh, we already talked about that last year, search the forum. Or here's the link to the old discussion." I think it is great that we have a database within the forum threads that has also built up over time, and those who have been here longer can bring the 'gems' back to the top or just refer the question to the thread where it was answered. But I think sometimes it may be a knee jerk reaction to say, "oh, we already discussed that", because the new person is thinking, yeah, but I want to discuss it now!! Injecting the playfulness kind of got us out of the doldrums of the same-old-same-old questions...

I remember the first time I saw the thread on virtual song-circle and I asked Why can't we post songs to each other so we can hear them? Nah, the answer was - files to big, won't work... lo and behold, now some are doing it. j0 is right, we will see the forum continue to change, and as we get to the point where we are having a real international song circle by hearing each other over the internet, then it will really be an amazing place to visit.

I was also trying to imagine myself as a newcomer here, so thanks for that input, Liam. The way I was trying to understand it was thinking of what it is like at our session, where I have been only going for 2 or 3 years, but the session is at least 5 years old, with the older 'regulars' kind of being the 'insiders'. It is odd to be kept on the outside by the 'inside' group. The weird thing is that the old hotel was sold three weeks ago where we play, so now there is a question of whether the members of the session who have been meeting longer will quit coming and start their own session - without inviting the rest of us who still show up at the hotel lobby and try to 'carry on'. The last two weeks, there have only been about 5 of us show up to play and sing, when there often used to be 10 to 15 musicians, at least. Someone speculated that the insiders may have taken 'their' session somewhere else.

Subject: RE: Proselytizing
From: j0_77
Date: 06 Oct 99 - 12:45 AM

I do not get to read all the treads since I've a 14" monitor and it is hard on my eyes - so occasionaly I print a topic of interest as I did this. Now that said Lesley's post made me think real hard about why I visit the cat.

I am not an insider - I say it like it is! That sometimes get's me into hot water.

I came here for the Data Base - since it is easier than loading a DOS shell on my machine to print lyrics I need. Second - hard to believe but true - I archived a stack of blues recordings 25 years ago - still have it but it reamins 8000 miles away. So it's not for the blues that I come back.

There is also the opportunity to get a second opinion on a lot of things which are advertised - Festivals.
Next learning what is going on in 'your' locality as well as keeping up with what is going on in other places.

Other resources - to find out chords for a song, to get a Midi of a tune - etc. It all adds up to a great site. That said the 'DT' which I never have tried sounds more like what I woud've expected.

The likelyhood of a virtual folk club is happening here and I admit I did push Max about MP3's and a page for "US" meaning "YOU" to post your songs so that "I" can hear them, I believe so strongly in this that already I have sent Max a little song written, arranged and recorded for the Mud Cat Radio show.

Commercialism and the cat, regrettable and IMHO a complete waste of 'bandwidth' - If I like what "YOU" do in the MudRadio - (assuming Max and Bert have the courage to braodcast home made music) and you have a CD then I may buy that. I do not want to be polled on this or any other site which claims to be a folk one - into buying CD s or anything else. There is enough junk mail in my life already.

The ease and convenience of MP3 technology is making it increasingly possible to buy just one or two tracks off of a 'Virtual' CD - which I applaud, whether the cat can benefit from that remains to be seen. I do know if the cat does not some other agency will. Probably Amazon as they are media ready.

For my part - teacher of sorts - I would not want to make commercial stuff. Folk to me is a free and home made thing .

Topics BS etc- Folk is big businness - till they 'Corpo world' can get it under their control. That is simply a fact of life. However because like the small farms still producing natural grown food - folk refuses to cooperate - it is still longhaired kids /adults doing it 'their way' Oddly the Corporate therapy is cut the hair cut the 'cr??' get the profit and deafen the listener.( Increasing bizz for the Medicorps BTW) and so on. Oddly what makes Folk attractive is it's rebellious nature, it's charicters who do not drive BMW's, who do not have skinhead hair cuts, who would help rather than hinder, who do not make the bottom line the reason for anything and who convey the truth no matter how unpopular to the rest of society.

The fact that Corpofolk is trying it on here is why it is Big Bicks - to some extent and also because lots of people read these pages.

Right now there is a rapid increase in web users and 'twill grow even faster when newer hook up thechnology improves the 'bandwidth' restrictions which mean even full motion video feed will happen.

For that reason I beleive the cat will have to change it's format or dissapear. Perhaps in a couple of years we will see virtual radio become as common as regular FM is now, downloading shows by default, news and movies etc. I am here not talking about 'streaming audio' but MP? tecnology and Optical hook ups. You will be able to down load an hour radio show in 3 to 4 seconds at full specs in stereo. Amazin huh.

So for what it is worth I think I would want to support the cat while it is still here.

I hope the reader understands how important it is that there is a web presence for 'home made' music and song and TRUTH- Goodbye Mr Buchanan we know what you are because of the Interent, good bye Mr Bush Jr we know what you are not because of the internet. I suppose I ought to quit here.

Subject: RE: Proselytizing
From: JedMarum
Date: 06 Oct 99 - 12:44 AM

When I play a song in performance, I phrase the lyrics and ply the melody carefully and precisely (hopefully) in order to communicate what that song means to me. The song has a life of its own, but it is based upon what that song means to me (a closed and personal experience).

When I play a song in a session, with other players I play that song with a predicatble rythym and straight melody, so that others can join in easily. That song takes on a life of its own, and it is based upon the dynamics of the group (an open and democratic experience).

If we have participate in an open forum, we participate in an arena where many perspectives are represented. If we particpate in a closed club discussion, the repartee is, by definition, parochial. I believe the Mudcat forum is intended to be open. That means the topics of conversation will ebb and flow with influence of newcomers, passing or long term.

I am a new comer to Mudcat and have particpated in frequently music discussions (that is what brought me here). But i have also been guilty of particpating in much non-musical frivolity as well, and that is what has kept me coming back.

Wanting to keep the forum a 'parochial' experience is very much the same as I have seen at some music jam sessions; where Celtic sessions break up because the singer folkies and the jigs and reel folkies want their own session ... or where beginners are not allowed to particpate with the more advanced players, or where country pop is not allowed at folk sessions. These attempts to segregate, and 'stick to our own kind' tendencies may be a typical human response, and they may be appropriate, but they are not open minded and welcoming.

My experience as a new comer here has been quite positive. I have found people intelligent, humorous, open minded, fun loving - and our primary common interest is music! I don;t want to see the forum close the doors to people like me.

Subject: RE: Proselytizing
From: Lesley N.
Date: 05 Oct 99 - 11:15 PM

Good points Joe - though I almost didn't read this thread!

I too feel the tone has changed. Though I've been around along time (I've used three different names I think), I've only been active sporadically - and that usually in regard to technical or academic questions. I did, however, always feel that my questions were warmly recieved and generated thoughtful, pertinent responses. DT was a very enjoyable classroom with the best teachers I've ever had. I never felt part of the "in crowd," but I felt very welcome and even, occasionally appreciated! It is quite a neat feeling to be able to help someone else - most of the time others, more knowledgable than I, get there first!

I'd felt a change for a while, but I was still rather surprised to the responses to the thread a bit ago about the link categories (and I wasn't the one to start the thread). The discussion went in a direction that made me uncomfortable, frustrated and irritated - something I have NEVER felt at DT. I shrugged it off, but decided that I would not venture beyond information requests much in the future (and here I am.)

I've striven to avoid the BS, though I sometimes check in on them because sometimes there's not much else I haven't read. And while I don't mind a bit of suggestive fun, the vulgarity disturbs me. I react to it the same way I do at parties, shrug and move on. The political discussions I avoid entirely because they often become vituperative. And I don't know why people deign to answer personal attacks at all - though I understand the desire to defend the person attacked.

I suppose the gist of all this is that I too sense a subtle change in DT that disturbs me. While I don't feel part of the "in group," I don't feel frozen out or left out. But I do feel sad that there is less that interests me and occasionally a mean spirit. However, I am back to frequenting newsgroups and I have seen a lot worse. DT is still a valuable resource with interesting people so I'll just continue a low profile and look for the occasional gem (the John Jacob Niles thread is still one of my favorites - short, sweet, fascinating, funny and a great help to me).

Subject: RE: Proselytizing
From: WyoWoman
Date: 05 Oct 99 - 11:05 PM

I think the idea of a "back room" link somehow would be a great idea. I also read the music threads, but don't feel I have much to add, so I'm not posting to them. Merriment, gaiety, silliness and friendship, I can always contribute to and enjoy. When it gets to be too much -- and it sometimes does -- I just scan the postings and then go elsewhere.

But it might be a good compromise to have a way of offering that "after hours" camaraderie that is a large part of what I've enjoyed here in a way that doesn't alienate the more serious music seekers and, as Joe says, weaken the 'Cat's credibility.

WW

Subject: RE: Proselytizing
From: Alice
Date: 05 Oct 99 - 09:19 PM

Hi, Joe and everyone. This is a tough subject, and I think we covered some of it already in past discussions of censorship. I have to say that I must have been feeling some of the "vibes" that Joe describes, but like Joe, I can't really desribe a remedy EXCEPT for this one... It would be, in my opinion, good for those who are posting to ask themselves "does this belong in the chat room, personal message, or on the forum, and how does it relate to music"?

I have not posted much lately, since the lyrics threads I added and the compilation of singing threads. (Did anyone even read those? The lyrics mostly fell off the page with no comment.) I have been busy with other things, but I also have not read too many threads that held my interest, the way many had in the past. Maybe we all go in cycles in our involvement, too, being really excited when we first get the addiction to Mudcat. I did enjoy the fun of the Blake Madison story, the teasing that goes on reminds me of the kind of bonding people do when they share the same experiences.

BUT, I do miss the threads about music, instruments, songs, tunes, singing, playing. There just aren't as many on the topic of music as there used to be. Hopefully, it is just a cycle, and the music threads will thrive again. If members recall what brought them to the forum and think of that when they start threads, maybe the music focus will be sustained. If members enjoy the fun and banter, but remember this is a music forum, hopefully, the threads about lyrics and tunes will not disappear.

By the way, I mentioned TRAD TV being what would happen if folk music ever became commercially popular. I think it was last year when we were talking about 'what if' trad music became as popular as rock. My comment was we would all be here on the Mudcat, discussing how the videos just don't look like what we thought the song lyrics should be, and how TRAD TV would ruin folk music ;-) Just kidding... maybe.

Alice Flynn

Subject: RE: Proselytizing
From: Peter T.
Date: 05 Oct 99 - 08:16 PM

Dear Joe, yes, you are right, it is subtle. It may be a personal thing -- I tend to like the diversity, but somebody else may feel that it is too crazy, "noisy", or spinning beyond some model of what this sort of thing should do. And I respect that (that may not be your feeling, it was just an example).
I do worry about the insider stuff, simply because I am an insider just by virtue of being here long enough, and helping to create some of the jokes and personal references. I have said in an earlier thread that I hated the "elite stuff" that keeps people out of "inner circles", and if I felt that was a deep problem, I would be really worried, rather than mildly worried -- and this is easy to say once you are an insider. But it is true, I think, that apart from the genuine friendliness and openness at this site (if anyone asks what the hell someone means by something, everyone here springs into action) that a Web site like this is different fundamentally from many of the problems associated with "real world" elite circles. First of all, you can choose your moment to enter a discussion, which is not true in the real world. That is, you can think of the best thing to say on your own time, and in your own way, and those present will respond. Or you can just read threads, without anyone knowing you are listening in. And you don't have to give your real name, and you can take a long time to think about a response, and so on. I think this helps explain why shy people like the Web -- almost none of the physical signs of your shyness or gaucheness or eagerness to get into the group appear. No one needs to know of your existence until the moment you are ready. I personally was incredibly intimidated by the knowledge of people here (like you), but I took some time (like others) to warm up, get the feel of it, and then get in. Other people do this too. This is basically why I love it. The best thing about a Web community like this for me is that it tips the balance in favour of outsider entry into hitherto insider conversation. I believe this is true, but again I am working only from my biased perspective: but that is the reason why I have not really worried about the analogy with people being frozen out of real groups. I am prepared to be completely wrong about this.
yours, Peter T.

Subject: RE: Proselytizing
From: Jeri
Date: 05 Oct 99 - 08:15 PM

Oops - lost control of my italics - "what people think" was the only thing that should have been italicised. And that last sentence was, again, only speculation.

Subject: RE: Proselytizing
From: Jeri
Date: 05 Oct 99 - 08:11 PM

It seems this topic comes up quite often. I wondered about it once in a thread, and a few new Mudcatters responded that they were drawn to the freedom of the forum. But that message was in a BS thread - anyone who didn't like off-topic stuff wouldn't have been reading it anyway.

We can sit here forever talking about what we believe other people think. None of it is valid - we're guessing. The only way to get a good idea would be if Max put a survey somewhere, like on our personal pages. Each person should be able to fill out only one survey (at least initially) so one person doesn't send in a whole pile. Some groups I've been involved with send an e-mail survey to members, but you don't get honest opinions when the identities of individuals submitting the survey are known.

I honestly don't see how folks who are here for "music only" would feel unwelcome, unless they were led to believe they were expected or required to take part in the non-music stuff.

Subject: RE: Proselytizing
From: annamill
Date: 05 Oct 99 - 06:35 PM

Interesting Joe and Peter. I sometimes come in and really don't find anything that I'm interested in commenting on. I don't go into or post on the continuing story threads, and I spend only a small amount of time in the tavern threads. I don't post very much on music threads, but I read most of them. I just feel paled next to the amount of knowledge available here. I've learned a lot and my interests have peaked to new heights including subjects I didn't even know interested me until I came here. That doesn't only include music. I've learned about troubles in Ireland that I was only slightly aware of, but had no real interest in till I heard from 'catters. I'm trying new books that I've never even have come near if not for those BS threads.

When I came in, it was for a song, but I was enveloped in the complete roundness here. The caring, humor, love, knowledge, sharing... Gads. Any new comer, if they stay long enough to include the BS will stay. Some of it is discombobulating (?SP), but you can either enjoy it, or bypass it and move one to the other threads.

Also, Joe, you say the mood is changing. Yes it is. Constantly. It's like New England weather. If you don't like it, wait a minute. There is always something new happening. Right now it has you discombobulated(?SP), but we'll go on to something that holds your interest soon, no doubt.

There, my 2 cents.

Love, annap

Subject: RE: Proselytizing
From: Joe Offer
Date: 05 Oct 99 - 05:59 PM

Hi, Peter - it's a subtle matter of tone, and I don't think a poll would detect what I'm trying to detect. I'm asking us all to take a step back from the 'Cat and try to view it objectively, and ponder for a moment. What impression do we make on visitors, and is this the impression we want to make?
You make a very good point about the danger of things getting too dull around here, so it IS a delicate balance. Same with the idea of control - if you control the Forum too tightly, it loses its spontaneity, and we certainly don't want that. Still, I have this feeling that something isn't quite right with the Forum, and I think it's worthwhile to consider alternatives. It's at the point where I feel a bit uncomfortable, where I get the feeling that I don't quite "belong" here.
This community of ours is an interesting phenomenon. On one hand, we are an absolute dictatorship. This site belongs to Max, and he alone has control and authority. He listens to Dick and Susan and I think he wouldn't do anything they wouldn't want, so they have authority. But they are the only ones who have authority, and they pretty-much leave things alone. There are a few of us who have "edit" buttons, but you can be sure we try our best to do what Max and Dick and Susan want us to do - leave message content alone, and edit only the technical things and the duplications. So, are we a dictatorship, albeit a "benevolent dictatorship," or perhaps are we an "enlightened anarchy"? Although only Max and Dick and Susan have "authority," I think that we all have varying degrees of "credibility," based on the personnae we have built for ourselves during the time we have been here, and the contributions we have made.
But that's all a bit off the point. My main question is whether the presence of the insider stuff enhances or detracts from the value of the Forum as a folk music resource.
Over to you, Peter. (grin)
-Joe Offer-

Subject: RE: Proselytizing
From: Peter T.
Date: 05 Oct 99 - 05:16 PM

Dear Joe, as a co-friendly-combatant with Elsie, as a major BS person, and as someone who came here because I was an outsider to folk music and found that this collection of expert folkies wasn't forbidding, I take your remarks seriously. It does seem to me that anyone who comes here can figure out pretty quickly which threads are about music, and which are not. There is a clicking device on your computer. But if you think that the music part is getting swamped, that is worth weighing. You are a keeper of the flame. But you are an old hand (as I am, in a lesser way) -- and we don't know what a new arrival experiences, and what he or she comes for. I came for a tune, and stayed for a chat. Are new people confused or horrified, or bemused?? How do you know that people are unhappy with the current mix? What would a poll tell us, and whose voices would weigh the most?

Having weighed this in my own mind, I still don't see it as a problem even if it is true -- the place has evolved, and by and large I personally prefer the evolution. I thought it was nice, but got sort of boring after awhile. It livened up considerably when the most recent pack of lunatics arrived to brighten up our lives!!! (Not denigrating previous lunatics in any way, of course). I have no idea what I will find here on any given day, and I think it is great. It is life at work. Still, as you know I am prejudiced in favour of the sound of my own voice, and more seriously, in favour of the mix -- that is what keeps me here.
As a result, I am really unhappy with the proposal for the segregation of the off-immediate-topic (I won't call it BS) conversations from the rest into a different "backroom" place. That would change the place drastically, and I don't think for the good. Most people want to have their stuff seen on the "front burner" of life. And how you would police that in the middle of a thread I don't know -- what happens in the case of the Mexican music thread that just started if someone starts asking about the music, chords, and then starts asking about appropriate customs for playing political songs in Mexico, and... -- you cut off their thread?

But while we are on technical schemes, how about this? How about giving people a choice of two colours (blue for music, and some very dull colour (not the bright green) for designating something else? Or some other font? Would that be enough for you, or do you really want to try shunting the conversation off into another space?

Me, I would leave it alone, except for Max's innovations to generate money. It seems to me to be working just fine, and in fact, thriving quite happily as is.
yours, Peter T.

Subject: Music, or BS???
From: Joe Offer
Date: 05 Oct 99 - 04:14 PM

I used to do a little proselytizing, encouraging people to come to the 'Cat, but I've become a little reluctant to do that. I'm afraid people will be taken aback by all the bullshit threads.
I know that those of you who participate in the BS threads think it's good, clean fun; and you can't understand why anybody would object. Well, it HAS caused a change in the atmosphere here, and I'm not sure it's for the good. This place used to be a very credible, valuable resource for information about folk music. It still is, but I think the overpowering presence of the BS threads has damaged the 'Cat's credibility. It's kind of like walking into a library when a rock band is playing inside, or trying to carry on an intellectual discussion at a loud cocktail party. There certainly IS a place for humor here, but I much prefer the gentle, subtle humor that used to have more of a presence here. Yeah, I'll readily admit a lot of the stuff in the BS threads is really funny, but I still think it scares off the people who come here to talk about music and that it excludes people who don't feel like "insiders."
The change that is caused by all the BS is a subtle thing, but I do think we need to think about it and ask if the atmosphere is what we want. I'm not sure what I'd do. I don't like to complain, and I don't like to see any sort of restrictions on discussions. I didn't like it at all in 1997 when Elsie appointed herself as "folk police," and would jump all over anybody who dared to talk about anything other than what she considered to be traditional folk music.
I guess if I were Max, I'd create a link on the main forum page to a "back room" for the "BS" threads, and gently ask people to keep the insider stuff in the back room. I'd leave the menu display for the back room threads at one day, but I'd set the main forum at three days, so threads on music would stay up a little longer. That way, new visitors would come in and find the music discussions they're looking for, and yet those who want to play could feel free to do so without disturbing those who come to talk music.
Well, my friends, I just thought I might give you something to think about.
-Joe Offer-

Subject: RE: Proselytizing
From: WyoWoman
Date: 05 Oct 99 - 11:01 AM

Big Mick will now join us in his G-string...Oh, heck, I mean G-chord. Sorry fellas, I was in the wrong thread.

Scoff if you want, but just think of it: Birkenstock currently has NOPLACE to advertise on television!

Take stock in Birkenstock, folk will rise again. Can I get an "Amen?"

ww

Subject: RE: Proselytizing
From: Allan C.
Date: 05 Oct 99 - 10:19 AM

OHMYGAWD! What have I done?!!

Subject: RE: Proselytizing
From: Peter T.
Date: 05 Oct 99 - 10:12 AM

(Catspaw's Rag in the background on the Hammond organ....Camera picks up ecstatic crowd in vast bodhran shaped hall. At the front The High Folk Priest begins to chant:)
Frieends, I look out at you and I see people who have not yet begun to believe in Folk, I see wasted lives, hurting people, lost people, people with limbs dangling where there shouldn't be limbs, and I hear an unformed question on their lips -- What must I do to be saved? Friends in the HALL OF FOLK and you at home watching, the truth is simple. Follow my healing words. Open your wallets, put your VISA cards on top of the TV set, call this toll-free number that tolls for thee, and repeat after me: number and expiry date, number and expiry date. You know that emptiness in your life? Well, now it will be replaced by a new emptiness! And now, just before we hear from Brother Fielding on the Lost G Chord, here is a brief message from our leader, Max Vobiscum....... (and so on)

Subject: RE: Proselytizing
From: Matthew B.
Date: 05 Oct 99 - 08:55 AM

Egads, we're turning into missionaries!

NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Subject: RE: Proselytizing
From: Allan C.
Date: 05 Oct 99 - 08:17 AM

I'll get back to you on this great idea, WW, as soon as my ship comes in. Meanwhile, at least Primestar offers a "Folk" selection on their music-only channels. It's a start.